[Wikipedia-l] Copyright concerns (was Wikipedia spanks Encarta, Brockhaus)

[Jens Ropers]

Resending this email (which I earlier sent to foundation-l to 
wikipedia-l, as the main discussion seems to be ongoing there:

On 2 Oct 2004, at 17:41, Elisabeth Bauer wrote:

> One last important thing: If something like this happens, please don't 
> start actions without consulting the local people involved. So far we 
> have good contacts to the c't. But things like a full text translation 
> of the article can seriously damage this relationship. And it would 
> fall back to us, not the international crowd.
>
> greetings,
> elian

<AOL>I STRONGLY second that.</AOL>

Without sounding too much like a prick, reading the previous emails, 
where someone (IIRC) tried to argue that a translation of an existing 
text was an original work--

IT IS NOT!!!

U.S., E.U. and international laws are '''quite''' clear on this point. 
You absolutely CANNOT publish the translation of a copyrighted work w/o 
the original author's consent!
Please DO NOT go there.

I'm seeing _a lot_ of naivety lately, as regards copyright:

1. That's a '''problem''' for the submitter (because they--not the 
Wikipedia--are legally fully liable for the text they are submitting to 
the Wikipedia).

2. It's a '''bigger problem''' for the wiki process -- because if a 
copyright-infringing text gets submitted and then that text sees a lot 
of development, it will be an absolute MESS to sort things out later. 
(Positions and interpretations on what to do vary from "delete 
everything as the successive edits are derivative works of a work that 
was not licensed in the first place" right through to "keep it if more 
than <insert arbitrary number here> percent of the sentences are 
different from the unlicensed original source." Legally the tendency is 
to argue for deleting everything which potentially scraps many, many 
people's hard work.)

3. It's a '''shit-has-hit-the-fan situation of absolutely stellar 
proportions''' if such problems arise with respect to Wikipedia PR. 
Because with our PR, not only does the Wikipedia likely become liable 
for the screw-up (instead of the submitter being liable), it also will 
cause the public to view us as wholesale intellectual bootleggers.

PLEASE, let's ensure that things never get so fubar.

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com